Pursuit of Happiness

Julian Hickok

[A paper delivered at a conference of Georgist organizations, July 1977]

In the Declaration of Independence of 1776, it states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." What is the "Pursuit of Happiness?"

In his recent book, In Defense of Property, Gottfried Dietze quotes John Locke, "An individual acquires property as soon as he mixes his labor with things." And David Hume, "Whatever is produced by man's art or industry, ought, forever, be secure to him." The "Pursuit of Happiness" then, in the expression of man's right to the full enjoyment of the product of his labor.

In order to secure the rights of man to property, security of possession of the land was granted. This led to confusion in the concept of human rights and property rights. At the time of the Declaration of Independence, unjust taxation was recognized as the chief cause of complaint. The war was fought on this issue. A Constitution was drawn up and ratified by 1789 to secure these unalienable rights to the people. A nation was founded with wonderful prospects for the future. But something was wrong.

When William Penn laid out Philadelphia in 1682, an area of over 14 square miles, provision was made for every home to have a garden and trees. By 1789, it was densely developed and was the second largest English speaking city in the world, next to London, and was confined in an area of only one square mile. Why did this happen?

The early settlers came to America primarily for freedom, although high wages were definitely a great incentive in the early years. Many of them had never owned land but were aware of the power of land ownership. They promptly grabbed as much of the cheap land as they could but did not proceed to develop it. There were greater attractions in the established area of security and economic advantages in the exchange of skills and products by association. Those who came over who had owned land in the old country were prompt to take advantage of the situation, even buying titles from some of those who were too poor to develop the land. This stimulated a land boom and encouraged land speculation.

With continuing increase in population and lessening access to an open frontier, competition for jobs increased and wages fell. Thus the poor became poorer and the rich became richer. This seemed to confirm the belief that the rich were responsible for the poverty. This condition was world-wide and had been growing for many years. It was coming to a climax when Karl Marx came along. In the name of Democracy, he exploited the idea of equality of property. To him it was the right of majority rule, to take from the rich and give to the poor. This is tyranny.

When the United States was established, it was asked, what kind of government did we have. Some said it was a democracy but wiser heads said it was a republic. Actually it was created in the concept of Federalism. Local districts could have their town-meetings with the politicians too close to the people to impose excessive taxation. The people were free to move out of the district.

The Constitution provided that, "Representation and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states ... according to their respective numbers," and "The powers not delegated to the United States ... shall be reserved to the States, or to the people." It was not until 1913, with the adoption of the 16th Amendment, that "Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived." There is now no place to go in the "Pursuit of Happiness."

In 1879, Henry George culminated his search for the answer to the enigma of poverty in the midst of plenty. He gave the answer and the remedy in his famous book, Progress and Poverty. According to Henry George, the cause was the popular misconception of the right of private property in land. The remedy is to make land common property. He did not propose to distribute possession of the land among all the people but to take the rent of land, the profit due to land ownership for public use. He would use the existing machinery of taxation, within the system of free enterprise. He further proposed that all private property, the product of labor applied to land, be exempt from taxation, that man may continue, without government interference, in the "Pursuit of Happiness."

Thus we have two schools of thought. Karl Marx, in his Das Kapital proposed the extension of Socialism, ultimately to create a slave state. Henry George would use the natural law , within free enterprise, to secure the unalienabie rights of all the people. The ultimate victory will be Marxism or Georgeism. Which shall it be - slavery or freedom?